Cunningham v. Federal Brueau of Prisons
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-05818
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Cunningham v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, Judge Swain ordered the incarcerated plaintiff to pay fees or submit authorization before the case could proceed.
Kristopher A. Cunningham, whose civil action could proceed only if he paid the required fees or submitted the required prisoner authorization within 30 days.
What happened
In Cunningham v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, Kristopher A. Cunningham, who was incarcerated and representing himself, submitted an application to proceed without paying court fees upfront. He did not submit the required prisoner authorization.
The court ordered Cunningham, within 30 days, either to pay $402 in fees or submit the authorization allowing installment deductions from his prison account. The court said no summons would issue yet and warned that the action would be dismissed if he did not comply.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also determined that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying appeal fees. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Cunningham v. Federal Brueau of Prisons · No. 1:23-cv-05818
- Laura Swain
- July 10, 2023
Background
Kristopher A. Cunningham, who was incarcerated at Metropolitan Detention Center and proceeding without a lawyer, brought a civil action against the Federal Bureau of Prisons. He submitted an application to proceed without prepaying court fees, but he did not submit the required prisoner authorization.
Order
The court explained that a prisoner who wants to proceed without prepaying fees must submit both a signed application and a prisoner authorization. The authorization allows the prison facility to provide certified account statements and deduct the $350 filing fee from the prisoner's account in installments. The $52 administrative fee does not apply to a person granted permission to proceed without prepayment.
Within 30 days of the order, Cunningham had to either pay the total $402 in fees or complete and submit the attached prisoner authorization, labeled with docket number 23-CV-5818 (LTS). The court directed that no summons issue at that time. If Cunningham complied, the Clerk's Office would process the case under its procedures; if he failed to comply within the allowed time, the action would be dismissed.
Other ruling and effect
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal. The order did not address the merits of Cunningham's underlying claims. It also cautioned that certain future dismissals could count as strikes under the prisoner-filing statute.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.